This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Tamar Christina <Tamar dot Christina at arm dot com>
Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, nd <nd at arm dot com>, "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, "bonzini at gnu dot org" <bonzini at gnu dot org>, "dj at redhat dot com" <dj at redhat dot com>, "neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org" <neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "aoliva at redhat dot com" <aoliva at redhat dot com>, "Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de" <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:16:02 -0600
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
References: <20180711112233.GA15865@arm.com> <5640622e-c73e-5148-69c6-b7328f5c8ff0@redhat.com> <20180712174503.GB24275@arm.com> <HE1SPR8PMB313619F632C7C70234D9740FF520@HE1SPR8PMB313.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <957ef324-3ec3-2cb0-b973-9d2ca3b2cfe4@redhat.com> <AM4PR08MB0737D7961E10D0D86E7C8514FF510@AM4PR08MB0737.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>

On 07/20/2018 05:03 AM, Tamar Christina wrote:
>> Understood.  Thanks for verifying.  I wonder if we could just bury this entirely
>> in the aarch64 config files and not expose the default into params.def?
>>
> 
> Burying it in config.gcc isn't ideal because if your C runtime is configurable (like uClibc) it means you
> have to go and modify this file every time you change something. If the argument is 
> against having these defines in the params and not the configure flag itself then I can just
> have an aarch64 specific configure flag and just use the created define directly in the AArch64 back-end.
Not config.gcc, but in a .h/.c file for the target.

If we leave the generic option, but override the default in the target
files.  Would that work?

Jeff

Follow-Ups:
- RE: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Tamar Christina

References:
- [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Tamar Christina
- Re: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Jeff Law
- Re: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Tamar Christina
- RE: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Tamar Christina
- Re: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Jeff Law
- RE: [PATCH][GCC][front-end][build-machinery][opt-framework] Allow setting of stack-clash via configure options. [Patch (4/6)]
  - From: Tamar Christina

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]